|
|
本帖最后由 rhapsody 于 2009-9-11 22:51 编辑
【中文标题】“买美国货”——为什么不呢？
【原文标题】'Buy American' -- why not?
【登载媒体】洛杉矶时报（Los Angeles Times）
【来源地址】http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-hindery1-2009sep01,0,5121065.story
【原文库链接】http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-193538-1-1.html
【译者】gabirella
【校对】rhapsody
【声明】本译文供Anti-CNN使用，未经AC或译者许可，谢绝转载，谢谢合作
【致谢】感谢AC新同学gabirella的翻译，也感谢找来gabirella的渔音谦谦同学。
By Leo Hindery Jr., Leo W. Gerard and Donald Riegle
September 1, 2009
The governments of most major developed countries support their own industries and, in these economic times, it only makes sense for Washington to do likewise.
大多数发达大国的政府都支持其民族工业的发展。在如今全球经济总体下滑的现实面前，对于美国政府而言，只有实行类似的措施才是合乎情理的。
Federal government purchases make up about 20% of the U.S. economy, yet the United States is almost alone among the major developed nations and China in not having a significant "buy domestic" government procurement program.
联邦政府的采购支出占到了美国经济总量的20%。然而，在所有发达大国（以及中国）的行列中，美国几乎是唯一没有可观的“买国货”政府采购计划的国家。
No single economic stimulus initiative would do more in the short and long term to resuscitate U.S. employment, especially manufacturing employment, and to materially reduce our economy-zapping massive trade deficit than a fair "buy American" program.
无论从短期还是长期来看，在复苏美国就业——尤其是制造业就业方面，以及在实质性地减少损害经济的巨大贸易逆差方面，一项合理的“买（美）国货”计划比任何一项经济刺激方案都行之有效。
However, when even a fairly limited program was put forward in February as part of the economic stimulus plan, you would have thought that protectionist cowboys from the U.S. had attacked global motherhood and apple pie.
然而，当一项只是相当有限的“买国货”计划被包含在今年二月份出台的经济刺激计划之中的时候，你可能会有这样的想法：美国的贸易保护主义者破坏了全球（经济）秩序和美国价值观。
Representatives of our major trading partners immediately began discussing among themselves how to respond to the United States' alleged "protectionist drive," with China raging the loudest. Editorials overly influenced by the nation's self-serving free-traders hit several newspapers across the country, with the New York Times warning that "rather than supporting employment at home, the 'Buy American' effort could ultimately cost American jobs." And the usually credible Peterson Institute estimated that such an initiative would save or create a meager 9,000 jobs. But out of a total U.S. labor force of 155 million, the correct answer has to be at least a couple million or more because we are talking about transitioning so much of the U.S. economy -- most of nearly $3 trillion in annual government purchases -- to domestic-only origins.
我们主要贸易伙伴国的代表立刻开始讨论如何应对所谓的美国贸易保护主义势头。这其中，中国的呼声最大。而在国内，受到自私自利的自由贸易者思想过度影响的评论纷纷见诸报端。纽约时报发出警告，“‘买国货’最终可能导致美国就业状况的进一步恶化，而非挽救之。”信用度较高的彼特森研究所则估计，这项计划仅能保住或者增加微不足道的九千个岗位。但是，基于美国一亿五千五百万的劳动力规模，至少增加两百万甚至更多的就业岗位才有可能解决目前严峻的就业问题，因为我们谈论的是将美国经济的一大部分——即每年将近3万亿美元的政府购买的大部——转移到美国国内市场来。
In his first inaugural speech, President Franklin Roosevelt said that the nation's greatest task was "to put people to work." At the time, 13 million Americans were unemployed, and the economy was much better balanced between manufacturing and services.
在富兰克林·罗斯福总统的第一篇就职演讲中，他曾提到“让每个国民都有工作”是美国最重要的任务。那时美国有一千三百万人失业，而那时经济在制造业和服务业比重的平衡性要比现今好得多。
Now, however, there are nearly 30 million effectively unemployedAmericans, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for July. Manufacturing industries now represent just 11.5% of GDP; the number of people working in manufacturing account for only 9% of the jobs in the country; and we have run an average trade deficit in manufactured goods of more than $500 billion a year over the last five years.
但如今，根据劳务统计局七月份的数据显示，美国现有将近三千万的失业者。制造业仅占国内生产总值的11.5%；制造业的就业人数仅占总就业规模的9%；在过去五年里，美国平均每年在制成品上的贸易逆差就超过了5000亿美元。
The United States, with its enormity and geographic diversity, simply cannot prosper in the long term with less than 12% of its GDP coming from manufacturing. And because federal government purchases are strongly weighted toward manufactured goods, "buy American" would be a significant immediate boost to manufacturing's regeneration.
由于幅员辽阔、地形多样，如果制造业对国内生产总值当的贡献还不到12%的话，美国从长远来看不可能变得繁荣起来。由于联邦政府的采购大幅倾向于制成品，因此“买国货”会立刻极大地刺激制造业的革新。
It is naive and irresponsible to believe, as some in the administration do, that a service job is just as good as a manufacturing job. In fact:
认为服务业的工作和制造业的工作一样好——正如政府中的某些人那样——是幼稚，并且不负责任的。事实上：
* Compensation in manufacturing jobs was on average 15% greater than in non-manufacturing jobs in 2008, according to Bureau of Economic Analysis figures.
* 经济分析局的数据显示，2008年制造业工作的报酬要比非制造业工作的报酬平均高出15%。
* Service jobs do very little to help the U.S. balance of trade and mostly just move incomes around the country.
* 在促进美国的贸易平衡方面，服务业所起的作用微乎其微。服务业多半只是使人们的收入在国内流转。
* Manufacturing has by far the largest multiplier effect of all job sectors, creating $1.40 of additional economic activity for each $1 of direct spending, 2.5 other jobs on average for each job in the sector and, at the upper end, 16 associated jobs for each high-tech manufacturing job, according to a 2009 Milken Institute report.
* 米尔肯研究所2009年的一份报告显示，在所有就业领域里，制造业所产生的乘数效应[注]显然是最大的——其每1美元的直接投资能拉动1.4美元的额外经济活动，其每个就业岗位平均能带动2.5个其他的新增岗位，而在高端领域，每个高科技制造业岗位就能催生16个相关的就业岗位。
[注]乘数效应是一个经济学概念，指的是经济活动中某一变量的增减所引起的经济总量的变化的连锁反应现象。
In February, the loudest screams in opposition to the modest "buy American" requirements proposed in the stimulus package came here at home from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Consumer Electronics Assn., and overseas from China.
今年二月，对于经济刺激方案里提出的适度的“买国货”条款，最强烈的反对呼声来自本土的美国商务部、美国消费电子协会，以及海外的中国。
Yet both the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the electronics association are dominated, in their finances and thus in their policies, by multinational overseas companies that have large-scale operations in countries with their own significant buy-domestic programs.
但不管是美国商务部还是消费电子协会，在资金来源方面——进而是政策决策方面——都受到海外跨国公司的操控。而这些公司拥有的大规模营运项目所在的一些国家也各自有着可观的买国货项目。
It was particularly galling to hear objections from China, which is responsible for a staggering 78.5% of the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods so far this year.
尤其让人觉得恼火的是，这时候中国居然站出来反对“买美国货”——正是中国造成了美国在制成品上惊人的78.5%的贸易逆差。
China had an implicit buy-domestic program for years, and now, as part of its own stimulus program, it has a very explicit, countrywide "buy Chinese" policy. On May 26, Beijing said that henceforth government procurement must use only Chinese products and services unless they are not available within the country or can't be bought on reasonable commercial or legal terms.
在过去几年里，中国一直隐蔽地推行购买国货的计划。而如今，作为其经济刺激计划的一部分，中国已是明确地在全国范围内实行“买中国货”方针。5月26日，中国政府宣布，从今以后政府采购必须只用中国国内的产品和服务，除非出现在国内买不到，或者不能根据合理的商业或法律条款购得的情况。
"Buy American" provisions of one form or another have been around since the 1930s, and it is not opportunistic, unfair or inappropriate, as some have said, for us to have a strong one now, subject, as with other countries' programs, to goods being available in-country on reasonable terms.
自上世纪30年代起，“买国货”条款就以不同的形式一直存在着。而且就像一些人所说的，美国出台强势的“买国货”条款不是投机取巧，不是妨害公平，也不是不当举措；该条款的适用对象，正如其他国家出台的方案那样，是在国内能以合理的价格买到的商品。
It is important to note that "buy American" will have little or no impact on the cost of purchases by workers, as this initiative targets only purchases by the federal government, the effects of which are thus almost entirely captive to our own economy. That said, for the vast majority of Americans, the gains in lower prices because of trade and cheap imports long ago began to be outweighed by wage losses.
值得注意的是，“买国货”条款仅仅适用于联邦政府的采购行为，对于工人的购物成本影响甚微。因此，该方案所起的作用几乎只局限于美国本土经济。话虽如此，对于绝大多数美国人来说，很久以前通过贸易和廉价进口品而从低价格中获得的收益，已开始被工资的损失盖过了。
But it's not only Congress that needs to do the right thing; there seems to be problems as well with some in the administration.
但不仅仅只有国会需要摆出正确的姿态；政府内部某些人士似乎也存在一定的问题。
In April 2008, during the presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised that he would "ensure that our government procurement policies strengthen, rather than compete against, the interests of our domestic businesses and that they help create jobs for American workers."
2008年4月，在竞选美国总统期间，巴拉克·奥巴马曾作出承诺，“确保我们的政府采购政策能巩固国内的商业利益，而非与之竞争，并且能为美国工人创造就业机会。”
Yet Commerce Secretary Gary Locke recently waived important portions of the "buy American" obligation for the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program, saying they would be inconsistent "with the public interest." And the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has been working for the last month to curtail the inclusion of any such provisions in future U.S. legislation.
但是，美国商务部长骆家辉最近同意放弃宽带技术机会计划所需承担的“买国货”的重要责任份额，并称如果让其承担责任，则会“与公众利益”相悖。而就在上个月，美国贸易代表处就一直在努力减少类似条款在未来美国法律中出现。
All of this is wrongheaded. Rather than diminishing the already modest "buy American" provisions of the stimulus package, we should, in ways consistent with our World Trade Organization obligations, be expanding them to cover all national government procurement as other major powers do. And pending legislation that would ably accomplish most of this is Sen. Sherrod Brown's (D-Ohio) and Rep. Mike Michaud's (D-Me.) Trade Reform, Accountability, Development and Employment Act.
这一切都属于顽固不化。我们不应缩小经济刺激方案中“买国货”条款的适用范围，而是在不违背我们在世贸组织应履行义务的前提下，将该条款扩大到能够覆盖所有政府采购的程度，就像其他大国所做的那样。有望达成这个目标的酝酿立法是（俄亥俄州民主党）参议员谢罗德·布朗和（缅因州民主党）众议员麦克·米肖提出的贸易改革、责任、发展与就业法案。
At the same time, however, as we are adopting our own buy-domestic requirements, it is critical -- because the issues are linked -- that China and the U.S. also quickly agree on a fundamental readjustment of our bilateral trade relationship to better serve the long-term interests of both nations.
但与此同时，当我们批准买国货条款时，中国和美国要能迅速在双边贸易关系的根本调整上达成共识，这一点非常关键，因为这关乎两国的长期利益。
"Buy American" is neither un-American nor anti-globalization. It is simply good, necessary, balanced and reciprocal economic policy.
“买国货”既不是非美国的，也不是反全球化的。这就是一项既有效，又必要、且平衡、互利的经济政策。
【作者简介】
Leo Hindery Jr. is chairman of the Smart Globalization Initiative at the New America Foundation and an investor in media companies. Leo W. Gerard is international president of the United Steelworkers and a member of the executive council of the AFL-CIO. Former Michigan Sen. Donald W. Riegle Jr. is a member of the Smart Globalization Initiative and chairman of government relations at a global advisory company.
利奥·亨得利任新美国基金会全球化项目主席，也是一名媒体公司投资人。利奥·W·杰拉德是美国联合钢铁工人协会的国际主席，也是美国劳工总会与产业劳工组织的行政委员会成员。密西根前任参议员唐纳德·W·里格尔也是新美国基金会全球化项目的成员，同时也是一家全球化咨询公司政府关系部门的主席。 |
|
狗仔卡
发表于 2009-9-11 22:39
提升卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2009-9-11 23:07
楼主
